|
Post by Aj_June on Feb 16, 2019 13:52:30 GMT
VegasCare to share your answer on this topic.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Feb 16, 2019 14:28:32 GMT
Aj_June Sure... not a particularly interesting story, tho. It's all kinda hazy. I had to be as a pup in early elementary school... When I was a wee little Catholic kid. I remember being told it was bullshit. As a young Baptist teen.. I probably still thought it was bullshit... but didn't really care to think about it... as it was not vagina. It had to be my late teens, early 20s, when I gave it serious thought and realized that it made sense and that my childhood nuns where kinda hot.... uh.. I mean... full of well-meaning shit. It is obvious some form evolution is happening... If God is not real... It's the only explanation for life. If it turns out that God is real and we were created... It is plain to see He used previous forms of life to build the next step of life. Conversationally, I don't see The Bible directly contradicting that notion.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Feb 16, 2019 15:17:53 GMT
Aj_June Sure... not a particularly interesting story, tho. It's all kinda hazy. I had to be as a pup in early elementary school... When I was a wee little Catholic kid. I remember being told it was bullshit. As a young Baptist teen.. I probably still thought it was bullshit... but didn't really care to think about it... as it was not vagina. It had to be my late teens, early 20s, when I gave it serious thought and realized that it made sense and that my childhood nuns where kinda hot.... uh.. I mean... full of well-meaning shit. It is obvious some form evolution is happening... If God is not real... It's the only explanation for life. If it turns out that God is real and we were created... It is plain to see He used previous forms of life to build the next step of life. Conversationally, I don't see The Bible directly contradicting that notion. Thanks for sharing your initial thoughts about evolution and how your thoughts evolved about it.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 17, 2019 15:03:30 GMT
Where did you check into it, books and periodicals? Yes Plus it's pervasive throughout all of culture including schooling. To not research evolution is to fail a lot of classes. Where did you look? I don't remember research of evolution being important in many classes I took. But it was essential to two or three university classes I took. Since then I have looked to technical journal articles for information. What do you think about the very high percentage of DNA similarities between humans and apes? This isn't indicative of common descent to you?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 17, 2019 15:26:20 GMT
Yes Plus it's pervasive throughout all of culture including schooling. To not research evolution is to fail a lot of classes. Where did you look? I don't remember research of evolution being important in many classes I took. But it was essential to two or three university classes I took. Since then I have looked to technical journal articles for information. What do you think about the very high percentage of DNA similarities between humans and apes? This isn't indicative of common descent to you? No. It's indicative that we have DNA similarities. There is no reason assume that means we derive from the same ancestor although it is perfectly legal to make that assumption. Even 99% similarity in DNA results in millions of differences. The gap to explain those differences is a blanket statement of evolution. Of course, you are reading way more technical stuff than I would have an interest in because I don't necessarily think it's that important. All I know is that those technical journals do not reduce down to the scientific publications that simple guys like me would routinely visit so some additional enlightenment would be welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 16, 2019 18:11:29 GMT
Translation: Arlon doesn't have to back up his bullshit with credible scientific citations, but other posters do. He did this recently with me in a disputation over the supposed efficacy of faith healing over medicine. lol I am interested to know your initial thoughts about evolution? I am assuming much like me you were never ever religious to begin with...
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 16, 2019 18:39:34 GMT
He did this recently with me in a disputation over the supposed efficacy of faith healing over medicine. lol I am interested to know your initial thoughts about evolution? I am assuming much like me you were never ever religious to begin with... I have always thought evolution the most likely explanation for the development of life on earth. I don't ever remember a time - even when I was in Sunday school, back in the day - when the notion that life today is as it ever was seemed sensible or that a series of small changes, driven by a constant need to survive, would not make for huge results in the long term.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 16, 2019 18:47:35 GMT
I am interested to know your initial thoughts about evolution? I am assuming much like me you were never ever religious to begin with... I have always thought evolution the most likely explanation for the development of life on earth. I don't ever remember a time - even when I was in Sunday school, back in the day - when the notion that life today is as it ever was seemed sensible or that a series of small changes, driven by a constant need to survive, would not make for huge results in the long term. Yeah, same here. Only for whatever reasons I became extremely excited by the thought that all species on earth evolved from singled celled organisms. Obviously, the initial understanding was rather juvenile because I had not read any textbook and was trying to understand the concept from what I was told by my uncle. Because I lived in a large family there were a lot of cousins and everyone pitched in with their own thoughts. But my basic was always clear on the matter. I assume Britain had become reasonably detached from religious ideas (at least in urban places) by the time you were a kid and so it must have been a lot easier to grasp the concept than it would be for an average American or an average person of any deeply religious country.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 16, 2019 18:55:56 GMT
I have always thought evolution the most likely explanation for the development of life on earth. I don't ever remember a time - even when I was in Sunday school, back in the day - when the notion that life today is as it ever was seemed sensible or that a series of small changes, driven by a constant need to survive, would not make for huge results in the long term. Yeah, same here. Only for whatever reasons I became extremely excited by the thought that all species on earth evolved from singled celled organisms. Obviously, the initial understanding was rather juvenile because I had not read any textbook and was trying to understand the concept from what I was told by my uncle. Because I lived in a large family there were a lot of cousins and everyone pitched in with their own thoughts. But my basic was always clear on the matter. I assume Britain had become reasonably detached from religious ideas (at least in urban places) by the time you were a kid and so it must have been a lot easier to grasp the concept than it would be for an average American or an average person of any deeply religious country.
Yes; I am always interested to hear of those (in America normally) for whom evolutionary theory, with the weight of consensus behind it, came as a real surprise - usually when they took the sciences as a study course away from their home town and were confronted by the standards of modern knowledge, for the first time without any filter.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 20, 2020 0:52:53 GMT
Time to bump this thread as there are some new members posting on this board and I would be interested to see their response to this thread. paulslaugh , @homergreg , onethreetwoOld members whose response I would like to see gameboy , OldSamVimes (especially given his new pro-right leaning stance).
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Mar 20, 2020 1:30:21 GMT
When I was in 7th grade science class, so I would've been 13 years old. I had a male teacher in his late thirties or early 40s who tried to be very diplomatic about evolution. He told the class that he had to teach evolution, but that he didn't know a single scientist that didn't believe in a higher power. At the time I believed him.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 20, 2020 1:31:53 GMT
When I was in 7th grade science class, so I would've been 13 years old. I had a male teacher in his late thirties or early 40s who tried to be very diplomatic about evolution. He told the class that he had to teach evolution, but that he didn't know a single scientist that didn't believe in a higher power. At the time I believed him. You grew up in Minnesota?
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Mar 20, 2020 1:34:30 GMT
When I was in 7th grade science class, so I would've been 13 years old. I had a male teacher in his late thirties or early 40s who tried to be very diplomatic about evolution. He told the class that he had to teach evolution, but that he didn't know a single scientist that didn't believe in a higher power. At the time I believed him. You grew up in Minnesota? I did. I've lived in MN my whole life.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 20, 2020 1:40:57 GMT
I learned about it from my nephew, who happens to be a monkey. After he told me, I said, "well I'll be a monkey's uncle".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2020 2:14:15 GMT
As long as I can remember, I was fascinated with science. I had preschool books that had dinosaurs, and my mom was big in finding me books and magazines that had youth oriented science articles. I was probably 5 or 6 and remembered the charts showing evolution over millions of years with all the different eras. I also would go to church with my grandmother, and was taught about Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden.
I don't remember there being a big deal about reconciling the differences there. I'm not sure who I was talking to, but when talking about the 7 days to create it all, there was something said about God thinking a thought once every 10 thousand years, and how things were all relative and how the big bang sounded a lot like "Let there be light", and although there were people here and there that were hung up on the Earth being 4 thousand some years old, we just let them think what they wanted to think. So many people weren't in to proving themselves right back then, it was more about getting along. I guess we have changed over the years as a whole.
Even though the church I went to was full of "bun heads", very Evangelical, there wasn't a real concern with fighting science, more a concern with Jesus' love. Complete acceptance of everything scientific just has never been an issue for me. I've rejected following God, and I've accepted following him as well, and science just has never been the issue surrounding that rejection or acceptance within myself. It's more a lot of years abiding vs those years not, and the truth I've found when I do believe, practice and enjoy the fruits of the spirit that I know from experience just isn't in my nature without God.
Great thread! Thanks for bumping it!!!
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Mar 23, 2020 11:20:13 GMT
At school
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Mar 23, 2020 13:19:28 GMT
When was the first time that you recall you became aware that there is a theory that explains how life evolved on earth? What was your feeling (if you could remember) after knowing that we are a product of evolution of billions of years?
I think I came to know about it when I was about 8 or 9. It was summers and there were frequent power cuts in my small town which was located in the poorest state of India. So we used to go to the roof of the house and sleep in the open air as inside the house it was burning hot. My uncle was then a student of science and he used to tell us kids about different things and it was him that told us first about the big bang theory and the theory of evolution. I remember I was super excited and extremely happy to know that humans evolved from early ape-like creatures who themselves evolved from different looking creatures. My uncle's knowledge may not have been totally correct but he did pretty well to get the main point across that all life form ultimately share a common ancestor. But it was still fun to listen to him and his own theories such as how horses were smaller in size 1000s of years ago and how our left hand will eventually disappear ( I am not sure if any of that is true or he made up all that). I remember even trying to read his books when I was 9 or 10 but I was not able to understand a lot. But I never had a problem in getting the main point. I was totally happy and fascinated by the scientific theory of evolution. But then there's a worldwide survey that says that majority of Indians have no problems in accepting evolution as in fact more people in India accept it (percentage wise) than people of any other country.
I wonder how you folks took to it? May be some of you atheists might have been religious then? So did you readily accept it or had conflicts or disbelieved it? Or still disbelieve it?
I have always read at a much higher level than my grade. Everyone in my family has read more or less above their grade. No one in my family or at the very expensive schools we attended took the Bible literally because we always understood that it was not supposed to be. I've known that as long as I've known anything about the Bible. The Bible isn't really very antithetical to evolution. The origin story is a sort of evolution, although rather sketchy and concerned with other things at the same time. It has the progress from plants and fish to higher life mostly right at least, if not better. Later it describes genetically modifying a population of sheep, more or less as people had been breeding plants and animals for thousands of years before that Bible story was written. While other people perhaps found it disturbing that humans might have evolved from lower forms of life, it never bothered me. One reason might be that I never considered my body to be my main identifying feature. I have always felt that "I am not this body" as the common expression goes. I have already told this board about my experience at about 8 or 9 years old in a waiting room reading magazines (I could easily of course). I saw an article titled "We Don't Have Bodies, We Are Our Bodies," or words to the same effect. Even at that age I knew it was wrong. Obviously others agreed with me or there would have been no need for the article. I do not recall being coached to think that way by anyone though. I believe it is a natural sensation for quite many people. Nothing about Darwin was stunning news then as you can see. Obviously other people had very different experiences. On one side were the people who could not read at a highly abstract level and demanded a simplicity of interpretation of the Bible that was problematic. In response to those people were the people who felt no need to read abstract writing, and probably could not anyway, who hoped to replace religion with science in the mistaken belief that "religion" was the problem. The "Creationism vs. Evolution" debate was always poor, uneducated people with very limited reading ability on both sides. That is the way I have always seen it. The breakdown of marriage and morality came later as people who could not succeed in either science or religion turned to government to enforce their silly notions and started taking more and more control of things they shouldn't. Much later the "Tea Party" began trying to reduce the scope of government. They failed, Donald Trump jacked up the national debt as bad as any before him and that was before covid-19.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Mar 23, 2020 14:15:58 GMT
I have always read at a much higher level than my grade. Everyone in my family has read more or less above their grade. No one in my family or at the very expensive schools we attended took the Bible literally because we always understood that it was not supposed to be. I've known that as long as I've known anything about the Bible. The Bible isn't really very antithetical to evolution. The origin story is a sort of evolution, although rather sketchy and concerned with other things at the same time. It has the progress from plants and fish to higher life mostly right at least, if not better. Later it describes genetically modifying a population of sheep, more or less as people had been breeding plants and animals for thousands of years before that Bible story was written. While other people perhaps found it disturbing that humans might have evolved from lower forms of life, it never bothered me. One reason might be that I never considered my body to be my main identifying feature. I have always felt that "I am not this body" as the common expression goes. I have already told this board about my experience at about 8 or 9 years old in a waiting room reading magazines (I could easily of course). I saw an article titled "We Don't Have Bodies, We Are Our Bodies," or words to the same effect. Even at that age I knew it was wrong. Obviously others agreed with me or there would have been no need for the article. I do not recall being coached to think that way by anyone though. I believe it is a natural sensation for quite many people. Nothing about Darwin was stunning news then as you can see. Obviously other people had very different experiences. On one side were the people who could not read at a highly abstract level and demanded a simplicity of interpretation of the Bible that was problematic. In response to those people were the people who felt no need to read abstract writing, and probably could not anyway, who hoped to replace religion with science in the mistaken belief that "religion" was the problem. The "Creationism vs. Evolution" debate was always poor, uneducated people with very limited reading ability on both sides. That is the way I have always seen it. The breakdown of marriage and morality came later as people who could not succeed in either science or religion turned to government to enforce their silly notions and started taking more and more control of things they shouldn't. Much later the "Tea Party" began trying to reduce the scope of government. They failed, Donald Trump jacked up the national debt as bad as any before him and that was before covid-19. The breakdown of marriage and morality came later as people who could not succeed in either science or religion turned to government to enforce their silly notions and started taking more and more control of things they shouldn't.
You mean the breakdown in the facade of marriage and morality. People have always cheated in their marriages, especially the men, and were just as immoral as they are now. Please use your superior reading skills to read up on the morality of the Victorian era. Back then the Trumps of that day believe they could cure syphilis by having sex with an underage female virgin. Although the extremely rich and powerful have always been inclined to take advantage of their wealth and power, there are times when they do so less. Also it has ever been disapproved more or less. Henry VIII, remember now? Was there a "facade" at any point? Notice it had to be a facade, people couldn't admit what they were doing and had to hide it. As it broke down more they no longer had to hide it. It likely happens more now because no fault divorce laws began being passed in the 1970s and spread across the country. Now not only do they not have to hide it, they can skip over the troublesome red tape.
|
|
klandersen
Sophomore
@klandersen
Posts: 886
Likes: 344
|
Post by klandersen on Mar 23, 2020 15:33:48 GMT
First learned about it in school probably grade school.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Mar 23, 2020 21:29:31 GMT
Although the extremely rich and powerful have always been inclined to take advantage of their wealth and power, there are times when they do so less. Also it has ever been disapproved more or less. Henry VIII, remember now? Was there a "facade" at any point? Notice it had to be a facade, people couldn't admit what they were doing and had to hide it. As it broke down more they no longer had to hide it. It likely happens more now because no fault divorce laws began being passed in the 1970s and spread across the country. Now not only do they not have to hide it, they can skip over the troublesome red tape. Although the extremely rich and powerful have always been inclined to take advantage of their wealth and power, there are times when they do so less.
True. FDR and his cousin Teddy are good examples. And facade just means “in the closet.” And the closet isn’t just something for gay men. they no longer had to hide it. So it’s more moral to pretend to be moral rather than just being honest? You might be surprised how many people do not dare break rules. Some of them don't because they just do what they are told without question. It's by their nature. Some of them understand why the rules exist and why they shouldn't break them. Those people are least likely to break rules. When the rules are no longer "posted" the people who follow them without question suffer. For example if the state says it's okay to smoke marijuana they will because they don't know any better. If the state allows it, they might flit in and out of marriage like an airport gift shop. I suspect you overestimate the number of people who break rules, especially regarding the past.
|
|